You are very right. And I read pg's essay on how to disagree too. While I (for this audience I will assume-- obviously) agree with jmc's objections to intelligent design on that page, pretty much all of his politically-geared statements would back up my name-calling above.

<ul>

<li>He supported Bush in 2004 and reasons read like a list of right-wing talk radio talking points. I will not take up space by refuting each one of these points here because they have been dealt with elsewhere, but for starters, why the concern about Iraq's human rights violations in contrast to the many other violators that are allies of the U.S.? <br><br>

(It is obvious that to refute each of his opinions would introduce a lot of off-topic discussion into this space, so I'll keep this mostly in the abstract, leaving it to you to digest jmc's views further.) To list a few other absurd ideas:<br>

<li>he speaks about "alarmism about the environment", and elsewhere allies himself with deniers of global warming (while avoiding making any direct arguments against it, so he's pulling a type 0 on the pg scale with some of his comments as well).

<li>he uses the term "Moslem fascists" which as far as I know has no direct meaning other than to link yourself with the intellectually sloppy hack writers working to market neoconservatism (and related wars).

<li>There are others, but I'm just making a general observation here, not writing a book. You'll form your own own opinions anyway...

</ul>

A lot on that page is written in a highly polemic style, a good example is the 2004 March 16 entry.

I wouldn't call him naive, but his general political attitude does seem overly hawkish.